Supreme Court allows NDAA ‘Indefinite detention’ of Americans to stand

The Supreme Court this week, refused to hear an Appeals court decision regarding the NDAA “indefinite detention”. This leaves Obama with the power to pack us up. While we are looking the other way. This should be the headline story today. But then again, we have the Basketball owner’s racism that is much more important. First a refresher.  From  August, 2012 post:  Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens: Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted …the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

Now back to the update:

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court means the federal government now has an open door to “detain as a threat to national security anyone viewed as a troublemaker,” according to critics.

The high court this week refused to review an appeals court decision that said the president and U.S. military can arrest and indefinitely detain individuals.

The controversial provision authorizes the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap, detain without trial and hold indefinitely American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.”

At the trial court, on Sept. 12, 2012, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District Court of New York ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and placed a permanent injunction on the indefinite detention provision.

Obama then appealed, and the 2nd Circuit authorized the government detention program.

Since the law passed, multiple states have passed laws banning its enforcement. Herb Titus, a constitutional expert, previously told WND Forrest’s ruling underscored “the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don’t think they have to.”

The judge explained that the plaintiffs alleged paragraph 1021 is “constitutionally infirm, violating both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment as well due process rights guaranteed by the 5th Amendment.”

From: Supreme Court green lights detention of Americans  Read more at WND

NDAA Passes Senate – Welcome to the Gulag or what they won’t tell you

Looks like this is the vote breakdown U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes. 84 to 15 with 1 not voting. Brave guy.

YEAs 84
NAYs 15
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Question:              On the Motion (Motion to Concur in the House Amendment to Senate Amendment to H.R. 3304 )
Vote Number: 284 Vote Date: December 19, 2013,  11:14 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Motion Agreed to
Measure Number: H.R. 3304

Congratulations America. We are now a totalitarian State. I know I have been beating on this bill, but just to let you know what you bought. Enjoy the Gulag. I will post the vote tally when available. You thought last year’s was bad? This is even worse. See Details Here

Even more onerous than the previous versions. It must be voted on by the House and by the Senate .Section 1071 of the version of the 2014 NDAA approved by the House and Senate committees this week expands on the scope of surveillance established by the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

From  August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

You might want to check out FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

So not only did Obama’s attorney lie about his Marxist boss’s corrupt intentions;he actually claimed that the abuse of American citizens was somehow acceptable because those unconstitutionally imprisoned might ask that the charges against them be produced after ONLY a few years behind bars!

Script from Video: Senator Levin told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.

“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levin. “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”

Here we have Rand Paul telling what it will take to get on “The List” of being a terrorist.

Defense One
  1. DefenseNews.com ‎- 2 hours ago
    In a vote that ended around 11:40 p.m. Thursday, the chamber voted 84-15 to pass the 2014 national defense authorization act (NDAA),

The defense policy bill is “one of the essential pieces of legislation the Senate considers every year,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said this week. The NDAA “is legislation that … puts muscle behind America’s most important strategic objectives around the globe.”

Levin said “the bill before us is not a Democratic bill and it is not a Republican bill. It is a bipartisan, bicameral defense bill.”

Appeals Court brings back NDAA “Indefinite Detention”

US Totalitarianism Wins Again As Appeals Court Brings NDAA’s Indefinite Military  Detention Back. While we are looking the other way, Detention is back.

The Second Circuit court has overturned a temporary injunction which had blocked the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – meaning Americans can now once again be kidnapped and held without trial.

The Tenth Amendment Center has a detailed breakdown of the ruling;

“In layman’s terms, Judge Forrest put a stop to indefinite detention, and the Second Circuit overturned that. It also permanently prohibited Forrest from attempting to do so again, ordering her to proceed with the case consistent with their opinion. NDAA “indefinite detention” powers are alive and well.”

The ruling stems out of Hedges v. Obama, a lawsuit filed in January 2012. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges and several other high profile figures brought the case in order to protest against the potential that the law could be used to harass outspoken journalists and political activists.

“Sadly, the “victory” lasted about 10 months. Today, US totalitarianism wins again,” laments Zero Hedge.

From  August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

…Yet incredibly, when pressed on the issue, this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would, after all, have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,.right”?

The group points out that the new Second Circuit ruling is completely incorrect because it claims that Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA says nothing about the government’s ability to detain citizens.

You might want to check out first FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:  Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Government Propaganda coming to our homes thanks to NDAA

So now more is discovered in this nasty bill otherwise known as the NDAA, (National Defense Authorization Act). Strange isn’t it that I just posted last week, Egypt kicks out Al-Jazeera, U.S. embraces news source. There apparently is no one who read the NDAA bill. As if our media wasn’t a propaganda machine for this regime already. Here we go:

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. Thanks go to The Lonely Conservative for this one.

So what just happened?

 Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, and went into effect this month.

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA “present fair and accurate news.”

“They don’t shy away from stories that don’t shed the best light on the United States,” she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: “Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate.”

Full Story over at Foreign Policy

Recall American Citizen Indefinite Detention NDAA (S.1867) 1031? Here is a refresher from Rand Paul. This amendment was voted down.

Barack Obama’s Surveillance Society

Yesterday I posted a story Obama” ‘Prolonged Detention”, otherwise known as FEMA Camps. Even Rachael Maddow took him on. He posited that it was now permissible to detain without trial as a preemptive move.Now on to part two. Before we get to the heart of the matter via the video, here is a bit of History.

From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”? (In Yesterday’s post, Obama seemed to think that ten years might be about right) -prolonged detention. Keep that phrase in mind.

Keep this in mind:

On July 2nd, 2008—Obama delivered a speech in Boulder, Colorado in which he promised the creation and establishment of a “Civilian National Security Force.” He further promised it would be “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as the US Military.”

It is well known amongst dictators, the world over, that a private army is necessary to control the great unwashed masses over which they force their rule.

We have seen Obama steadily assume dictatorial powers over apathetic Americans in just four and a half years. He has all but hushed the people’s voice in government, the US Congress, by simply by-passing them and ruling by executive order—just like any other two-bit dictator. Some feel even the US Supreme Court has lost the steel from its collective spine under withering pressure from our budding domestic dictator, Obama.
If one did not know better, one would think there is a move afoot to institute a complete Marxist insurgency in America with Obama at the top—and —at the leading edge.
“The things done in every Marxist insurgency are being done in America today.” … Retired Lt. General William G.”Jerry” Boykin says in a new video he has just released . Boykin is a decorated former Delta Force Commander, US Deputy Under Secretary for Defense, and a recipient of the Purple Heart

Senator Angus King: Drones Are ‘A More Humane Weapon’

These Independents are a menace. What is with these Maine folks who keep forgetting about the Constitution? Before the video, just a refresher on part of the NDAA.

Senator Angus King (I., Maine) appeared on MSNBC Friday to review his Senate Intelligence Committee hearing that pressed CIA Director nominee John Brennan about the White House’s drone program.

King spoke in favor of drones, describing the targeting killings as “smart artillery” and “civilized.” King did clarify that due process must be included in drone strikes. Sure.

NDAA: (For those who want more info: John Conners on the NDAA  and the ACLU  for more on U,S, soil is cosidered a battlefied).

In a stunning move that has civil libertarians stuttering with disbelief, the U.S. Senate has just passed a bill that effectively ends the Bill of Rights in America.
Quote:
The National Defense Authorization Act is being called the most traitorous act ever witnessed in the Senate, and the language of the bill is cleverly designed to make you think it doesn’t apply to Americans, but toward the end of the bill it essentially says it can apply to Americans ”if we want it to.”
Quote:
This bill, passed late last night in a 93-7 vote, declares the entire USA to be a ”battleground” upon which U.S. military forces can operate with impunity, overriding Posse Comitatus and granting the military the unchecked power to arrest, detain, interrogate and even assassinate U.S. citizens with impunity.
Quote:
Even WIRED magazine was outraged at this bill, reporting:
Senate Wants the Military to Lock You Up Without Trial
…the detention mandate to use indefinite military detention in terrorism cases isn’t limited to foreigners. It’s confusing, because two different sections of the bill seem to contradict each other, but in the judgment of the University of Texas’ Robert Chesney — a nonpartisan authority on military detention — “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Maine independent Sen. Angus King made the case that the use of drone warfare actually is not as evil as some of the detractors have suggested.

According to King, drones are less likely to inflict casualties upon civilians than other military operations undertaken in the last 1,000 years of warfare.

“To be honest, I believe that drones are a lot more civilized than what we used to do, you know, when [William Tecumseh] Sherman shelled Atlanta or when the Allies firebombed Dresden in World War II, it was all collateral damage. It was virtually all civilians. And that’s the way — that was the way of war until very recently,” he said. “The drones, although there is some collateral damage, basically is a very smart artillery shell. And we’ve been shooting artillery shells over miles and miles for many years and hoping they hit the right target. I think there’s just something creepy about drones that they can be controlled and people are uneasy about it. But if you put it in a context of 1,000 years of war, I think it’s actually a more humane weapon because it can be targeted to specific enemies and specific people.”

American Citizen Indefinite Detention NDAA (S.1867) 1031

Many of us bloggers have been posting about the secret “Kill List” of Obama which includes the killing of U.S. citizens. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. Finally it is getting attention. You might want to check out first FBI Director “I have to check and see if Obama can kill Citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

 From August, 2012 post: Obama fights injunction against unlawful detention of U.S. citizens

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

 

So not only did Obama’s attorney lie about his Marxist boss’s corrupt intentions;he actually claimed that the abuse of American citizens was somehow acceptable because those unconstitutionally imprisoned might ask that the charges against them be produced after ONLY a few years behind bars!

Script from Video: Senator Levin told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.

“It was the administration that asked us to remove the very language which we had in the bill which passed the committee…we removed it at the request of the administration,” said Levin. “It was the administration which asked us to remove the very language the absence of which is now objected to.”

Obama fights injunction against unlawful detainment of Americans

Obama fights the preliminary injunction granted to American Citizens against unlawful imprisonment. But Obama is not through with us yet. They are fighting it big time, and the rationale gets even more creepy. The argument goes something like this, if we are thrown in jail, we can always appeal, even though it may take years to prove our innocence. Guilty until proven otherwise, typical Marxist justice.

On May 16th,federal judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Barack Obama and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA),striking down those sections of the Act that provide the president the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without benefit of their 5th and 6th Amendment rights. As a reminder, keep in mind it was Obama that insisted that the language in the NDAA bill include Citizens:Obama lies-he insisted that detention of Americans be in defense bill

“But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill”.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Under the terms of the Act,Obama had been given exclusive authority to direct members of the US military to arrest and imprison anyone he believed to have “substantially supported” al Qaeda,the Taliban,or “associated forces.” When pressed by plaintiff’s attorneys about the practical extent of this authority,government lawyers admitted “…the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists,” admitting that “…even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA.”

Yet incredibly,when pressed on the issue,this Obama mouthpiece suggested to Judge Forrest that concerns about the president’s detention powers were excessive as American citizens would,after all,have the ability to file a writ of habeas corpus should they be illegally or improperly jailed! “How long does [such a] petition take,” asked Forrest? When Torrance refused to answer,the Judge continued,“Several years,right”?

So not only did Obama’s attorney lie about his Marxist boss’s corrupt intentions;he actually claimed that the abuse of American citizens was somehow acceptable because those unconstitutionally imprisoned might ask that the charges against them be produced after ONLY a few years behind bars!

 

Full story at Expose Obama and well worth the full read.

U.S. Military Personnel Exchange Program-for what purpose?

I picked up this story over at Commie Blaster. I have checked and I got this link as well from the Air Force, so it seems credible. Note the foreign language requirement. http://www.af.mil/shared/media/epubs/AFI16-107.pdf

Another day and time, I would not have even considered this a possibility, but now? I let it up to you to discern the meaning of this. Great way to have the Terrorists infiltrate our armed forces. Here we go with the Post:

U.S. Army Military Personnel Exchange Program in Colombia strengthens armies

U.S. Army Military Personnel Exchange Program is a Plot to Have Foreign Troops Implement US Marshall Law?

Enter the US Army Military Personnel Exchange Program, wherein officers in the US Army are being exchanged with officers from countries around the world for the purported purpose of cross training for international crisis.  What is happening right before our eyes is the international soviet socialist elite are putting together an international coalition army for the purpose of disarming the American citizens.

Understand, this army must be coordinated and considering the reality of diverse languages requires a communication system which has to be established before this foreign army can begin operations in the United States.  This is why we have all the cross training, in order to procure communication between the various foreign units.

Obama has signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 with Sections 1021 and 1022, authorizing military arrests and indefinite detentions of American citizens without any due process of law, in essence suspending habeas corpus just like Lincoln did at the beginning of the US Civil War.

Obama has signed HR 347 Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011, the no-Trespass legislation, designed to insure a violent response when peaceful American protesters take to the streets this summer to challenge their being disenfranchised through the corrupt and fraudulent corporate owned election process.

Obama has signed the executive order National Defense Resources Preparedness designed to deny resources to US patriotic militia after the conflict begins. 

This operation has been underway for many years now.  We all remember guns being confiscated from American citizens during the exercises conducted after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and right now there are Polish troops training in Illinois for gun confiscation in the United States. Not so sure I would go that far. H.T: 12160 Info

Obama signs new NDAA American detention guidelines

 
On Thursday, March 1, the die has been cast again as the American Republic entered the post-NDAA era. On March 1, the major provisions of that unconstitutional measure went into legal effect. Then, with another stroke of his pen, President Barack Obama implemented a set of regulations establishing the policies for implementing the immense powers granted him by the National Defense Authorization Act. Thus, he, and we, crossed into uncharted territory.Full Story at  New AMerican
 
The media have portrayed these directives as a move by President Obama proving the strength and sincerity of his resolve to never deploy the military to detain American citizens without a trial. A closer look reveals that the media blowing of the President’s trumpet is mostly sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Now we get our news from Russian T.V. Thanks Russia. I am a news junkie, but I sure missed the reporting of this gem. H/T: to Commie Blaster for the lead.

Uploaded by on Mar 1, 2012

In December of last year, the US Congress voted to pass the National Defense Authorization Act. The bill will allows the indefinite detention and torture of American citizens without a trial. This week President Obama has tweaked the highly controversial bill making it discretionary for the military to detain suspects, but it still gives him the authority to detain suspects. So does this change restore liberties that were originally stripped? David Seaman, journalist and host of the DL Show, joins us to analyze the changes.

Recall Rand Paul and his speech of what now makes up a Terrorist?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 726 other followers

%d bloggers like this: